Murray MacDonald was the Crown attorney in Cornwall throughout the Cornwall sex abuse scandal and cover-up. His father is Milton MacDonald, a convicted paedophile. There were reports from several people that Murray MacDonald was seen at the home of probation officer and “alleged” molesterKen Seguin and at the cottage of former Crown and Father Charlie’s lawyer Malcolm MacDonald. The latter allegations were denied by Murray MacDonald and others.

When charges were finally laid against FatherCharles MacDonaldin 1996 Murray MacDonald asked his good friendRobert Pelletier to serve as Crown for the case. In 1999 Pelletier stepped aside. Pelletier testified at the inquiry that he stepped aside because he realized that he might have to call Murray MacDonald to testify and that he could not cross-examine “a colleague and good friend.”

______________________

Sightings

The following persons reported various sightings of Murray MacDonald at various places.

MEDIA

January 27, 2009 — A former lawyer had to remove himself from a child sex abuse case in Cornwall because he was friends with a possible witness. Justice Robert Pelletier told the Cornwall Public Inquiry he could not continue prosecuting charges against a city priest in the 1990’s. He says some members of the community alleged Cornwall Crown Murray MacDonald was trying to obstruct justice but those allegations were never proven. Pelletier says MacDonald may have been called as a witness which could be a conflict of interest because he knew MacDonald personally and professionally. (Hear audio clip below) Hearings continue at 9:30 this morning.

[Transcript of audio clip: “ by the late spring of 1999 it became obvious that Mr. MacDonald, though not necessarily, may possibly have to testify and that I could not be cross-examining a colleague and good friend.”]

Crown served district well

Letter to the Editor

Cornwall Standard Freeholder

24 December 2008

Crown Murray MacDonald is the epitome of ethics, courage, loyalty, dedication, leadership and diplomacy. The citizens of this city are very fortunate that he was here for so long.

Daniel. Lalonde, CornwallComments on this Article.

So you have spoken

Reply | Report | Page Top Post #1 By dodger,

Church “Should Have Known Better”: MacDonald

Local News – AM 1220

December 19, 2008 — Cornwall’s top lawyer says “the church should have known better” when it came to an out of court settlement involving an alleged child sex abuse victim. Murray MacDonald told the Cornwall Public Inquiry he thought the alleged victim had more of a role in negotiations. But MacDonald says, morally, the church should have known better regardless. MacDonald is referring to a $32,000 settlement between an alleged victim and the local diocese. There was an illegal clause in the agreement that meant the alleged victim could not continue with his criminal complaint against an area priest. MacDonald says he and former Cornwall Police Chief Claude Shaver do not believe the church took the high road. (Hear audio clip below) A lawyer for the diocese objected to the evidence saying MacDonald was providing opinion and not facts. Commissioner Normand Glaude still allowed the questioning. Hearings continue.

[Transcript of audio clip: “There’s certain things that we have to do and be seen to be doing that retains the high ground. I don’t think that, nor did Chief Shaver, feel that that was done in this instance, and we were more upset by that component than we were about any criminal misconduct of the church.”]

Settlement flawed: Crown

‘CHURCH SHOULD HAVE KNOWN BETTER’ MURRAY MACDONALD TELLS INQUIRY

Cornwall Standard Freeholder

20 December 2008

Posted By TREVOR PRITCHARD,

The Alexandria-Cornwall Roman Catholic Diocese “should have known better” before striking a $32,000 deal with a former altar boy accusing a priest of sexual abuse, the city’s Crown attorney told the Cornwall Public Inquiry Friday.

“(David) Silmser, I thought, participated more in initiating the (deal) than he did,” said Murray MacDonald.

“But that doesn’t change the fact that the church should have known better.”

Yesterday was MacDonald’s third and final day on the stand at the Cornwall Public Inquiry, which is examining how institutions like the justice system and the local diocese dealt with allegations of historical sexual abuse. In the fall of 1993, the diocese paid Silmser $32,000 after he had told police he’d been sexually abused decades earlier by Rev. Charles MacDonald.

The settlement contained an illegal clause that kept Silmser from pursuing his criminal charges against the priest.

After the settlement, Murray MacDonald told the Cornwall Police Service that without a willing complainant, it would be extremely difficult to proceed with any charges.

The Crown attorney had testified earlier in the week he wasn’t aware of all the facts when he made that recommendation -including that the illegal clause was part of the settlement.

On Friday, he said certain institutions have to be “plus Catholique que le Pape” -which inquiry commissioner Normand Glaude helpfully translated as “more Catholic than the Pope.”

“If an institution claims to be on the high ground, I think we should always be careful – being Crown attorneys, priests, doctors, or anyone else in this room – to maintain that high ground,” he said.

A lawyer for the diocese objected to those answers, suggesting they had no factual basis.

During the 10-month investigation by the CPS, Charles MacDonald was never questioned directly, even though his attorney said he would be willing to undergo a polygraph.

Dallas Lee, an attorney for the Victims Group, suggested to Murray MacDonald that since the settlement had essentially rendered the CPS’s investigation “dead in the water,” it couldn’t have hurt to bring the priest in for questioning at that point.

Charles MacDonald might have given the CPS new information, or even confessed, Lee said.

“Do you think, in hindsight, it was worth a shot, sir?” he asked Murray MacDonald.

The priest would likely have given the same response he gave his superiors at the diocese, the Crown attorney replied: that any sexual contact he’d had with other men was consensual.

Although Charles MacDonald was eventually charged by the Ontario Provincial Police with sexually abusing a number of youths, all his charges were stayed in 2002 after a judge ruled they’d taken too long to come to trial.

The priest has constantly maintained his innocence.

At the end of Lee’s cross-examination, Murray MacDonald offered an apology to members of The Victims Group for any frustrations they might have had with the local Crown attorney’s office.

He told the commission that every one of his legal staff had experienced vicarious trauma, at one time or another, because of the cases they handled, and vowed they were not “cold-hearted bureaucrats.”

“Any mistakes we made, we apologize for,” he said. “They were never done in bad faith . . . we were trying otherwise to help these folks navigate through the criminal justice system.” Murray MacDonald has been the local Crown attorney since 1992. Hearings resume Jan. 6.
– – –

Glaude goes after lawyer for comment

CORNWALL (Staff) — Inquiry commissioner Normand Glaude admonished a lawyer Friday for questioning the actions of another party with standing at the proceedings.

Glaude called Michael Neville’s comments about the Coalition for Action “unfortunate” and said he was surprised to hear them from a “senior member of the bar.”

Neville had wrapped up his cross-examination of Murray MacDonald when he pointed out one unnamed party had not put any questions to the Cornwall Crown attorney.

“I’m going to simply say, Mr. Commissioner, that Mr. MacDonald should take that as recognition that his character, strength, and integrity speak for themselves.”

The Coalition for Action, which has presented the opinion there was a conspiracy in Cornwall to cover up sexual abuse allegations, was the only community group not to cross-examine MacDonald.

Glaude did not take kindly to Neville’s unexpected remarks.

“This is an admonishment to Mr. Neville -and to all of us -that those types of comments will not be permitted,” said Glaude. “I suggest that you govern yoursel

Conspiracy theorists outed

Cornwall Standard Freeholder

20 December 2008

Posted By CLAUDE MCINTOSH

Strange animal, this Cornwall Public Inquiry.

The hard-core theorists smeared many good innocent people while campaigning for the inquiry. The inquiry, they preached to us for years, would expose pedophile clans and send prominent citizens running for the hills, police incompetence and cover-ups in the highest of high places. But the hard-core conspiracists are the ones being exposed through the testimony given by some of the people and organizations they vilified.

Among the facts brought out by the inquiry:

The man who came up with the infamous pedophile clan tale testified he made up the story and passed it along to Perry Dunlop the self-proclaimed world’s only honest cop, who bought the tall tale hook, line and sinker. An alleged victim said he was told to put a priest’s name in his affidavit, even though he had never met the man. Another said he was told to say he was assaulted on a school bus trip because that way he could sue the school board. And just about everything former judge Garry Guzzo alleged came apart during thorough cross examination by lawyers David Sherriff-Scott and Michael Neville. As the inquiry lumbers along, it is not hard to understand why Dunlop refused to testify.

To say Guzzo was destroyed on the stand would be an understatement.

The man had hardly anything right. OPP Deputy Commissioner Chris Lewis told the inquiry this week that during a here-are-the-facts meeting in Guzzo’s Ottawa office, the former judge apologized for getting it wrong.

Yet, a couple of weeks later he was back making headlines with the same old stuff. And the media were buying into it. When asked at the end of his testimony how he could be so wrong about his pedophile clan allegations and just about everything else, a pathetic-sounding Guzzo blurted out that nobody had told him he was wrong. Apparently he forgot about that meeting in his office with Lewis and Inspector Pat Hall, when he apologized for getting it so wrong.

* * * *

A small but special ceremony took place this week at the home of former councillor Francis Guindon who turned 82. Joining family members for the event were MP Guy Lauzon and Mayor Bob Kilger, both of whom presented Guindon with certificates marking his long and distinguished service to the community.

He served 25 uninterrupted years around the council table, making him one of the longest serving elected officials in the city’s history.

And out of office, he was never shy about offering his opinion on council decisions . . . or in some cases, the lack of a decision.

Francis Guindon had one agenda: Make Cornwall a better place to live.

Along with faithful service to his constituents, he coined some great lines, among them, “each and everyone of us,” “it behooves me, Mr. Mayor” and “in no way shape or form.”

His colleagues were known to borrow the phrases. One of his peers of the day, the savvy Dick Aubry, coined them “Guindonisms.” Guindon was protective of his unbroken election record. Once, when Angelo Lebano, who had a defeat wedged between his equally lengthy tenure, declared that he was the dean of council, Guindon was on his feet to declare himself the “senior dean.” Ah, those were great (and interesting) times around the council table. We miss them.

* * * *

This Christmas-New Year’s holiday break presents a dilemma for the oil companies. Normally, they jack up the pump price a couple of days before Christmas to cash in on all the travel.

However, with world oil prices plunging, it will be difficult to drag out the worn out supply and demand defence.

* * * *

City administration offices will close on Wednesday and not re-open until Jan. 5. That’s an 11-day break.

Ah, the joys of working in the public service. Just wondering: way back when, who was the genius that sold this holiday break to city council? Sid Ryan (Ontario CUPE chief)?

Ya, ya. I know. They work hard and deserve the time off (and those of us out here in the jungle don’t).

* * * *

Pet peeve.

People who make guest appearances during the year (baptisms, weddings and funerals) but get to church early on Christmas Eve to make sure they get a seat.

* * * *
Some of the great Christmas tunes are sung by Jewish artists who don’t celebrate Christmas. – – –

Coffee Break

Article ID# 1355496

Mixed Reviews On Inquiry Media Coverage

Local News – Am 1220

December 19, 2008 — There have been mixed reviews about media coverage at the Cornwall Public Inquiry. Cornwall’s Crown attorney Murray MacDonald says it’s unfortunate a broader range of media have not been following the inquiry. He testified local journalists have tried to be objective which must have been difficult. That’s in contrast to an industry expert who had sharp criticism of the media during testimony last year. MacDonald says Commissioner Normand Glaude’s final report should look at how institutions deal with the media when cases are in court. (Hear audio clip below) Hearings continue at 9:30 this morning.

[Transcript of audio clip: “I was tempted many times to comment to the media on what I know to be — what I knew to be the truth, and perhaps I should have done that, but I still believe that I would have been too close to the line and sub judice myself, having been involved in the proceedings.]

Crown stands by ’93 advice to cops

CORNWALL PUBLIC INQUIRY

Cornwall Standard Freeholder

19 December 2008

Posted By TREVOR PRITCHARD

Crown Attorney Murray MacDonald stood by the advice he gave in 1993 to the Cornwall Police Service over whether it had grounds to charge a city priest with historical sexual assault.

MacDonald told the Cornwall Public Inquiry that information he later gleaned about David Silmser’s allegations would not have substantially changed what he told the CPS in September 1993 – namely, that they couldn’t proceed without a willing complainant.

“I would’ve drafted the letter (I sent them) perhaps differently,” said MacDonald. “But the conclusion I drew, others . . . have drawn the same conclusion with knowledge of all this stuff.”

Thursday was MacDonald’s second day on the stand at the long-running inquiry into historical sexual abuse allegations.

In late 1992, Silmser told the CPS he’d been sexually abused by a priest, Rev. Charles MacDonald, when he was an altar boy at St. Columban’s Church decades earlier.

Silmser would strike a $32,000 settlement with the local diocese in 1993 that prohibited him from pursuing his criminal case

In September 1993, Murray MacDonald sent a letter to the CPS, where investigators were asking what they should do if Silmser was unwilling to participate.

In his response, MacDonald outlined a number of concerns he had with their case – among them, that Silmser was a “very non-credible complainant.”

“Grounds are now even further obfuscated,” MacDonald wrote, “by the fact that he has evidently used this threat of criminal prosecution as a means of furthering his efforts to gain monetary settlement.”

Lead commission counsel Peter Engelmann listed a number of things MacDonald wasn’t told about the investigation before he composed that letter.

The Crown attorney’s office was never given details about Silmser’s alleged abuse at the hands of another man, probation officer Ken Seguin, Engelmann said. Nor was MacDonald ever shown the terms of the $32,000 payout, he pointed out.

“If you had known some of these facts,” asked Engelmann, “would it be fair to say that your opinion might have been somewhat different?”

“I doubt it,” said MacDonald.

But MacDonald admitted those facts made his letter seem like a “very harsh indictment on poor Mr. Silmser” and had he known them, he would have written it “dramatically differently.”

Citizens for Community Renewal attorney Helen Daley asked MacDonald if he was satisfied the investigating officer, Heidi Sebalj, had given him “everything of relevance” before he delivered his opinion.

“I presumed she had,” said MacDonald. “She had answers for every question I put (to her).”

MacDonald also testified Thursday he did seek the opinion of an outside Crown, because he’d previously disagreed with the local diocese’s position on civil settlements and didn’t want to be seen as a “witch hunter.”

“The last thing that I ever expected . . . was for anybody to think I was going easy on the church,” he said.

Silmser’s allegations against Seguin and Charles MacDonald were never proven in court.

In 1996, Murray MacDonald was named by former Cornwall cop Perry Dunlop as part of a conspiracy to cover up sexual abuse allegations in the area.

MacDonald told inquiry commissioner Normand Glaude he was “tempted many times” to respond to the conspiracy allegations, but never felt he could because they were still before the courts.

He also praised the local media for following the testimony of the institutional witnesses after national outlets gradually lost interest in the inquiry.

“I know the facts as I lived them, and there was no conspiracy involving the Crown Attorney’s office,” MacDonald vowed.

Cornwall’s Crown Not Aware Of Illegal Clause-MacDonald

Local News – AM 1220

December 18, 2008 — Cornwall’s Crown attorney says he will do things differently in the future. Murray MacDonald is testifying at the Cornwall Public Inquiry about his role in a prominent child sex abuse case. An alleged victim went to the police in the early 90s with an allegation against a city priest but later withdrew his complaint when he received a $32,000 out of court settlement from the local diocese. Part of the agreement meant the alleged victim could not proceed criminally. MacDonald told Lead Commission Counsel Peter Engelmann he was not aware of the illegal clause at that time. (Hear audio below) Hearings continue at 9:30

[Transcript of audio clip:

MR. ENGELMANN: Again, it would be good to have asked to see the document; correct?

MR. MacDONALD: Well, if I’d have suspected that clause was in there I would have wanted to see it. I just didn’t think it would be there.

MR. ENGELMANN: Would it be fair to say, sir, if you’re consulted about a civil settlement in the course of a criminal investigation and/or prosecution, you’re certainly going to ask to see it in future?

MR. MacDNALD: Well, I’m going to ask to do a lot of things differently.]

MacDonald denies saying he’d be ‘happy’ to see allegations disappear

CORNWALL PUBLIC INQUIRY

Cornwall Standard Freeholder

18 December 2008

Posted By TREVOR PRITCHARD

The city’s top prosecutor vigorously denied ever telling a fellow attorney he’d have been “happy” to see the sexual abuse allegations of former altar boy David Silmser disappear.

“He’s either egregiously in error, or he’s lying,” said Murray MacDonald, referring to statements that Malcolm MacDonald (no relation) gave to the Ontario Provincial Police in 1994.

Yesterday was Murray MacDonald’s first day on the witness stand at the Cornwall Public Inquiry, which is exploring how a number of institutions responded to historical sexual abuse complaints.

He was the the city’s Crown attorney in 1993, the year Silmser settled with the Alexandria-Cornwall Roman Catholic Diocese for $32,000 in exchange for dropping his criminal complaints against Rev. Charles MacDonald (also no relation).

Silmser had gone to Cornwall police in December 1992, accusing the priest of sexually abusing him in the 1960s and 1970s when he was an altar boy at St. Columban’s Church.

The case was closed in September 1993, after Murray MacDonald decided there was no longer any reasonable prospect of conviction.

Murray MacDonald told the inquiry he was contacted twice by Malcolm MacDonald, who’d acted as Charles MacDonald’s lawyer in the settlement: first early in 1993, and then shortly after the deal with Silmser was struck.

The first conversation was simply to let the Crown’s office know the civil suit was going on at the same time as the criminal investigation, Murray MacDonald said.

But in the second conversation, the tone shifted, and Malcolm MacDonald was “dismissive” of Silmser’s believability, the Crown attorney added.

“(Malcolm) left me with the impression he may be of the view that this would also end the criminal case,” he told lead commission counsel Peter Engelmann.

“So I specifically told him that, as you know, this will not end the criminal case. I wanted to make it very clear at this point.”

Engelmann showed Murray MacDonald the statement Malcolm MacDonald gave the OPP in 1994.

The OPP had reopened the city police’s investigation into Silmser’s allegations. In his statement, Malcolm MacDonald maintained that he’d told the Crown attorney the settlement was covering the criminal charges — and that Murray MacDonald replied “if everybody’s happy, I’m happy.”

Simply not true, Murray MacDonald said yesterday.

“I was particularly circumspect in my language in both telephone conversations with him,” he said.

“This is diametrically opposed to what I know happened.”

Malcolm MacDonald was eventually charged with obstructing justice, and pleaded guilty to one count in 1995.

He was granted an absolute discharge one month later.

Engelmann said that despite Murray MacDonald’s testimony, the fact remained that he decided “within days” that the criminal investigation should not proceed.

“That’s for a different reason,” the Crown attorney replied. “That’s because there’s a problem with (having) no complainant.”

“Fair enough,” said Engelmann. “But the ‘no-complainant problem’ arises from this settlement.”

But that was why the investigating officers were sent back to tell Silmser they could wrap up the criminal investigation, now that the deal had been struck, MacDonald said.

“I thought, we’ve got this past us,” he said. “I didn’t presume that (because of the settlement) he would no longer co-operate.”

Charles MacDonald was eventually charged in 1996 by the OPP with sexually abusing young people.

His charges were stayed in 2002 after a judge ruled his right to a trial within a reasonable amount of time had been violated.

It’s expected Murray MacDonald will be one of 12-15 witnesses called from the Ministry of the Attorney General’s office, the final institution to appear at the inquiry.

His testimony resumes this morning.

Article ID# 1351433

Comments on this Article.

What a waste of time and Money this Inquiry is..The only thing that has come out of this is putting Perry Dunlop in jail for being honest! As a Taxpayer-I want my money back!!!!

Reply | Report | Page Top Post #1 By Hillside,

…………………………….
Of course he is gonna deny everything it’s par for the course. What an insult to call him a crown attorney.

Reply | Report | Page Top Post #2 By dodger,

Ministry stands by local Crown

Cornwall Standard Freeholder

Friday, June 22, 2007 – 08:00

Terri Saunders

Local News – Officials with the Ministry of the Attorney General Thursday jumped to the defence of a Crown attorney in the wake of allegations he socialized with alleged child abusers.

“This allegation was thoroughly investigated by the Ontario Provincial Police on a number of occasions and was found to be baseless,” said Brendan Crawley, media spokesperson for the ministry.

“The allegation will be vigorously denied by Mr. (Murray) MacDonald when he testifies at the inquiry,” he said.

Seguin, who has been the subject of allegations of sexual abuse at the inquiry, committed suicide in 1994 before any criminal charges were laid against him. Malcolm MacDonald was charged with three sex-related offences in early 1999, but died in Florida in December of that same year before the charges went before the courts.

During testimony Wednesday, Renshaw described Murray MacDonald as having been in his 40s in the 1980s.

At that time, Murray MacDonald would have been in his 20s and he did not become the Crown for the region until 1992.

“The ministry maintains that he has consistently demonstrated the highest standards of professionalism and integrity in that position,” said Crawley.

Murray MacDonald wasn’t the only prominent member of the community whose name was bandied about by Renshaw during his testimony.

A number of police officers, priests and other professionals were also identified by Renshaw as having been at either Seguin’s house or Malcolm MacDonald’s cottage in the 1980s.

During cross-examination of Renshaw, a lawyer for the Alexandria-Cornwall Roman Catholic Diocese told Comm. Normand Glaude he wanted to fully examine any dealings Renshaw with other witnesses prior to the start of the inquiry as well as address things such as criminal records and documented substance abuse.

“I want to know what was going on and what his involvement was,” said David Sherriff-Scott, “because … his story will not up about a lot of things, including my clients.”

Sherriff-Scott said while it’s not his intention to dispute any of the allegations of sexual abuse leveled at Seguin by Renshaw, he does believe it’s his duty to suggest the other claims made by the witness are false.

“He’s made all these statements about all these people, including a number of people connected with my client and other institutions,” said Sherriff-Scott.

“(They) are assertions of essentially impropriety, of a behaviour, of a group, of a clan . . . all through the attachment of these people to a variety of locations and activities.

“We should be entitled to explore the credibility of these assertions very, very significantly.”

Dallas Lee, a lawyer who represents The Victims Group of which Renshaw is a member, said Thursday any individuals who are alleged to have any connection to any of the matters being put forth at the inquiry retain the right to defend themselves in person before the commission. He also took issue with the ministry’s decision to refute the allegations in the media.

“The purpose of this commission is to gather information relevant to its mandate from any and all sources,” Lee said.

“All accused persons, persons of interest, community members and community leaders have been repeatedly and publicly invited to come forward as witnesses at the inquiry to help the commission understand how allegations, rumours and innuendo have affected individuals and the community, as well as to help us understand how the relevant institutions have treated them.

“The witness box is the proper forum to reply to a witness’ evidence at the inquiry, not the newspaper.”

Glaude once again put his take on the issue on the record Wednesday, suggesting he isn’t about to start placing gag orders on witnesses who come forward to testify before him.

“It has been my practice, and it will continue to be my practice, to permit as much as possible the full exploration of a person’s testimony and of the cross-examination,” said Glaude.

“What we have to do here is take the evidece that we have: people that have been affected by this inquiry and have something to say.” The inquiry resumes Monday.

Witness says he ferried men to homes of alleged abusers; But at least one says the allegations are ‘crazy’

Cornwall Standard Freeholder

Thursday, June 21, 2007 – 08:00

Terri Saunders

Local News – A number of prominent Cornwall men spent time at homes owned by a probation officer fingered as a child molester and a Crown attorney charged with sexual assault in the 1990s, a witness told the Cornwall Public Inquiry Wednesday.

Gerald Renshaw said he personally observed priests, businessmen and police officers at the home of Ken Seguin in Summerstown and at Malcolm MacDonald‘s cottage on Stanley Island in the 1980s and 1990s. Seguin was a probation officer at the time who has been identified by a number of witnesses at the inquiry as a perpetrator of sexual abuse against young boys.

MacDonald was charged with a number of sex-related offences in March 1999 by officers with Project Truth, an OPP investigation into child sexual abuse in the Cornwall area. MacDonald died in Florida in December 1999 before his matter could go to trial and Seguin committed suicide in 1994 before he was charged with any crime.

On Wednesday, Renshaw testified he ferried people to and from Seguin’s house and MacDonald’s cottage and named several people he observed either at one or both locations, including current Crown attorney Murray MacDonald, Rev. Charles MacDonald, former Cornwall Police Chief Claude Shaver and city businessman Andre Pommier.

“How often did you see Charles MacDonald there?” asked Peter Engelmann, lead commission counsel. “Once a week, twice a week,” said Renshaw.

“Charles MacDonald and Ken Seguin had known each other for quite a few years. They were very good friends.”

Contacted Wednesday afternoon and informed of Renshaw’s allegations, one of the men named during testimony said he had no idea what Renshaw was talking about. “These guys are crazy,” said Pommier. “I don’t know Gerald Renshaw, I didn’t know Malcolm MacDonald, I’ve never been to any of these places and at the time it’s suggested I was, I was studying in Toronto. I wasn’t even in Cornwall.

“It’s unfortunate that people can just say these things about prominent members of the community and drag them into this.”

Renshaw, who is now 41 years old, testified he was sexually abused by Seguin over a 12-year period when he was a teenager and in his early 20s. For about two years between 1987 and 1990, Renshaw actually lived in Seguin’s house in Summerstown. He said while he was there, he observed other men, including former Alexandria-Cornwall Roman Catholic Bishop Eugene LaRocque, Rev. Kevin Maloney and former OPP and Cornwall police Inspector Stuart MacDonald.

Former city cop Perry Dunlop interviewed Renshaw about his assertions during a meeting between the two men at the McConnell Medical Centre in January 1997.

The site was chosen in order to ensure privacy, Renshaw said Wednesday. During the interview, Dunlop asked Renshaw if he believed the men who visited Seguin’s house or MacDonald’s cottage were acting in concert with one another.

“Do you believe . . . there was a large group of . . . high profile pedophiles operating here?” Dunlop asked.

“Very much so,” Renshaw replied.

During cross-examination Wednesday, an attorney for the Alexandria-Cornwall Roman Catholic Diocese questioned Renshaw about the fact he had no proof any of the people he says he saw at either location were doing anything wrong.

“You don’t have any first-hand personal knowledge of any wrongdoing by anyone at Ken Seguin’s house or Malcolm MacDonald’s cottage other than Ken Seguin,” said David Sherriff-Scott.

“Correct,” said Renshaw.

Also during cross-examination, Renshaw was asked by a lawyer representing the Ministry of the Attorney General to physically describe Murray MacDonald as he would have been during the late 1980s and early 1990s.

“Was he a tall man?” asked lawyer Darrell Kloeze.

“He was a bit taller than me,” said Renshaw, who told the inquiry he’sabout 5′ 9″.

“What kind of hair did he have?” asked Kloeze. “Was he bald?”

“He had short hair,” said Renshaw.

“How old was he?” asked Kloeze.

“He was in his 40s, I would say,” said Renshaw.

“If I told you that Murray MacDonald has testified that he was never at Ken Seguin’s house or Malcolm MacDonald’s cottage, what would you say?”asked Kloeze.

“I wouldn’t believe it,” said Renshaw.

“And if I told you that he has said he never socialized with them and he’s never been there?” asked Kloeze.

“I don’t have an answer for that,” said Renshaw.

Renshaw said he observed pornographic magazines and video tapes at MacDonald’s cottage and described the walls of a bedroom being “wallpapered” with pictures of nude men.

“If the door to the bedroom was open, anyone could see it,” said Renshaw.

During cross-examination Wednesday, arguments were made as to whether lawyers can question Renshaw about statements his brother Robert Renshaw made in previous court proceedings in an effort to establish Renshaw’s credibility.

Sherriff-Scott attempted to question Renshaw about statements Robert Renshaw gave during a hearing related to a civil case in which Robert talked about having a criminal record and a drug and alcohol problem. Sherriff-Scott said the transcript of the hearing contains admissions from Robert Renshaw he received money from Seguin in exchange for sexual favours.

Those statements were not put to Robert Renshaw when he testified at the inquiry earlier this year.

Comm. Normand Glaude said he would not allow the witness to be questioned about the content of the tatement.

Sherriff-Scott will continue his cross-examination of Renshaw when the inquiry resumes Monday at 2 p.m.